Patna High Court
Abdul RahmanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, denying bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners—Abdul Rahman, Md Noorsid Alam and Khurshed Alam—filed an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a case (PS‑Chhauradhano Case No. 282 of 2022) involving offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The informant alleged that the accused assaulted him and his uncle with knives, swords and other weapons, causing injuries to the head, hand and leg, and that Abdul used a knife to stab a vital part of the body. The petitioners contended that the injuries were minor, they were falsely implicated, and there was no intention to commit a serious offence. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the presence of the other accused emboldened Abdul and that stabbing constitutes a serious offence warranting custody. After considering the submissions, the Court declined to grant anticipatory bail, holding that the seriousness of the alleged assault outweighed the petitioners' claims, and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in view of the alleged assault and stabbing under the IPC.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 324, 34, 341, 379, 504
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- Indian Penal Code
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
- common intention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86920 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2022 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Abdul Rahman Son of Manane Manan Miya Resident of Village - Pakariya,
PS-Chhauradhano, District - East Champaran, Motihari.
2. Md. Noorsid Alam @ Nurshad Alam @ Md Nursid Aalam @ Nursed Alam
Son of Moharam Hussain @ Moharam Hussain @ Moharam Miya Resident
of Village - Pakariya, PS-Chhauradhano, District - East Champaran,
Motihari.
3. Khurshed Alam Son of Moharam Hussain @ Moharam Miya Resident of
Village - Pakariya, PS-Chhauradhano, District - East Champaran, Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Chhauradano P.S. Case No. 282 of 2022 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have antecedent of one case and the informant
alleges that he was going to Motihari along with his uncle in
connection of treatment of his uncle on 05.08.2022 at 01:00 PM,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86920 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
when he was intercepted by the accused persons and Abdul with
knife, Noorshed with sword and Khurshed with saria assaulted
him causing injury on head, further Nurshed assaulted by sword
causing injury on head and Reyaz along with Kherula assaulted
his uncle causing injury on hand and leg and Reyaz put towel
around the neck of the informant and started dragging, further
Anwar took Rs. 5,000/- while Kherula sntached his chain worth
Rs. 25,000/-
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant, it is next submitted that no doubt allegation of
assault is there, but then the injury suffered by the injured has
been opined to be simple in nature, which amply demonstrates
that petitioners never had any intention of committing a serious
occurrence. It is also submitted that specific allegation of
assaulting the informant by knife is against Abdul.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the anticipatory bail application and submits that petitioners
have antecedent of one case and the allegation of assaulting the
informant by knife is against Abdul, but then it is submitted that
presence of the petitioner nos. 2 and 3, at the place of
occurrence, emboldened Abdul to commit the occurrence of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86920 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
stabbing on vital part of the body. It is submitted that informant
was lucky that he did not suffer serious injury, but then had the
injury of knife been serious, in that event one can well imagine
the plight of the informant. It is also submitted that stabbing in
itself is a serious offence.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…